Sign-tracking to non-drug reward is related to severity of alcohol-use problems in a sample of individuals seeking treatment.

BACKGROUND: A prominent neuroscientific theory of drug addiction is the incentive sensitization model. Individual differences in the tendency to ascribe motivational salience to cues that predict reward, and involuntary "sign-tracking" (orientation towards) such cues have been identified as potentially important in understanding vulnerability to addiction and relapse. However, to date this behaviour has not been assessed in a treatment-seeking clinical population, who typically represent those most susceptible to alcohol-related harms and episodes of relapse. This highlights a significant gap in the literature pertaining to incentive sensitization and drug dependence. METHODS: Individuals accessing inpatient drug and alcohol services with alcohol as primary drug of concern were recruited to participate in a Cognitive Bias Modification (CBM) intervention. At the baseline assessment, participants completed various self-report measures (including the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test; AUDIT) in addition to a visual search task measuring sign-tracking to cues signalling monetary reward. At 3-month follow up, abstinence from alcohol was the primary outcome measure. All analyses and hypotheses were pre-registered. RESULTS: At baseline (57 participants), AUDIT scores correlated with sign-tracking to signals of monetary reward. In a subsequent regression analysis sign-tracking, gender and self-reported alcohol craving predicted abstinence at 3-month follow up (41 participants). CONCLUSIONS: Our work demonstrates that involuntary sign-tracking to cues signalling non-drug reward is associated with problematic alcohol use and return to use at 3-month follow up, in a treatment-seeking sample. Whether this automatic prioritisation of cues signalling reward is a consequence or vulnerability for problematic alcohol use remains to be investigated.

Effects of outcome revaluation on attentional prioritisation of reward-related stimuli.

Stimuli associated with rewards can acquire the ability to capture our attention independently of our goals and intentions. Here, we examined whether attentional prioritisation of reward-related cues is sensitive to changes in the value of the reward itself. To this end, we incorporated an instructed outcome devaluation (Experiment 1a), "super-valuation" (Experiment 1b), or value switch (Experiment 2) into a visual search task, using eye-tracking to examine attentional prioritisation of stimuli signalling high- and low-value rewards. In Experiments 1a and 1b, we found that prioritisation of high- and low-value stimuli was insensitive to devaluation of a previously high-value outcome, and super-valuation of a previously low-value outcome, even when participants were provided with further experience of receiving that outcome. In Experiment 2, following a value-switch manipulation, we found that prioritisation of a high-value stimulus could not be overcome with knowledge of the new values of outcomes alone. Only when provided with further experience of receiving the outcomes did patterns of attentional prioritisation of high- and low-value stimuli switch, in line with the updated values of the outcomes they signalled. To reconcile these findings, we suggest that participants were motivated to engage in effortful updating of attentional control settings when there was a relative difference between reward values at test (Experiment 2) but that previous settings were allowed to persist when both outcomes had the same value at test (Experiments 1a and 1b). These findings provide a novel framework to further understand the role of cognitive control in driving reward-modulated attention and behaviour.

Mechanisms underlying performance in a cued go/no-go Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer paradigm.

Environmental cues that remind us of rewarding outcomes (drugs, food) play a significant role in addiction relapse. In the lab the Pavlovian-to-instrumental transfer (PIT) task has been used to formally examine how cues associated with reward or punishment can bias ongoing instrumental responding. Using a version of this paradigm that integrates PIT with a go/no-go task many studies have related stronger PIT effects (with non-drug rewards) to problematic alcohol use including risky alcohol users relative to non-risky drinkers, individuals with alcohol dependence versus healthy controls and individuals in recovery from alcohol use disorder who are more likely to relapse. However the theoretical importance of these findings and the implications for models of addiction was previously not clear. Understanding if this task indexes the general motivating effects of reward cues on instrumental responding (and whether this is sensitive to shifts in motivation for those outcomes) is critical for understanding these previous results within the context of addiction. Thus, in the current study we aimed to delineate the associative mechanisms that drive the stimulus effects observed in this PIT task. Specifically, we wished to examine whether the cueing effects observed in the cued-go/no-go task were selective in their effect on action, insofar as Pavlovian cues specifically invigorated (or suppressed) responding only if they were associated with congruent outcomes. We conclude that the PIT measured with this task is general in nature. Surprisingly however, the biasing effects of Pavlovian cues on instrumental responding did not appear to be sensitive to outcome devaluation.

Images of Australian alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages: A validation dataset.

For multi-session alcohol cognitive bias modification, a large image dataset depicting both alcohol and non-alcoholic beverages is required. We photographed a wide range of beverages and then validated them in a group of Australian community participants: 47 women and 39 men, aged from 18 to 73, who drank alcohol at least occasionally in the last year, with Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) scores ranging from 1 to 33. Participants were asked to categorize images as alcoholic vs non-alcoholic, rate the familiarity of each beverage and rate their craving for each beverage. The dataset includes all images and ratings for each image, stratified by gender and high/low AUDIT scores. Mean ratings per participant per beverage category are also provided.

Making habits measurable beyond what they are not: A focus on associative dual-process models.

Habits are the subject of intense international research. Under the associative dual-process model the outcome devaluation paradigm has been used extensively to classify behaviours as being either goal-directed (sensitive to shifts in the value of associated outcomes) or habitual (triggered by stimuli without anticipation of consequences). This has proven to be a useful framework for studying the neurobiology of habit and relevance of habits in clinical psychopathology. However, in recent years issues have been raised about this rather narrow definition of habits in comparison to habitual behaviour experienced in the real world. Specifically, defining habits as the absence of goal-directed control, the very specific set-ups required to demonstrate habit experimentally and the lack of direct evidence for habits as stimulus-response behaviours are viewed as problematic. In this review paper we address key critiques that have been raised about habit research within the framework of the associative dual-process model. We then highlight novel research approaches studying different features of habits with methods that expand beyond traditional paradigms.

Attentional capture by signals of reward persists following outcome devaluation.

Attention, the mechanism that prioritizes stimuli in the environment for further processing, plays an important role in behavioral choice. In the present study, we investigated the automatic orienting of attention to cues that signal reward. Such attentional capture occurs despite negative consequences, and we investigated whether this counterproductive and reflexive behavior would persist following outcome devaluation. Thirsty participants completed a visual search task in which the color of a distractor stimulus in the search display signaled whether participants would earn water or potato chips for making a rapid eye movement to a diamond target, but looking at the colored distractor was punished by omission of the signaled reward. Nevertheless, participants looked at the water-signaling distractor more frequently than the chip-signaling distractor. Half the participants then drank water ad libitum before continuing with the visual search task. Although the water was now significantly less desirable for half of the participants, there was no difference between groups in the tendency for the water-signaling distractor to capture attention. These findings suggest that once established, counterproductive attentional bias to signals of reward persists even when those outcomes are no longer valuable. This suggests a "habit-like" attentional mechanism that prioritizes reward stimuli in the environment for further action, regardless of whether those stimuli are aligned with current goals or currently desired.

Reward learning and statistical learning independently influence attentional priority of salient distractors in visual search.

Existing research demonstrates different ways in which attentional prioritization of salient nontarget stimuli is shaped by prior experience: Reward learning renders signals of high-value outcomes more likely to capture attention than signals of low-value outcomes, whereas statistical learning can produce attentional suppression of the location in which salient distractor items are likely to appear. The current study combined manipulations of the value and location associated with salient distractors in visual search to investigate whether these different effects of selection history operate independently or interact to determine overall attentional prioritization of salient distractors. In Experiment 1, high-value and low-value distractors most frequently appeared in the same location; in Experiment 2, high-value and low-value distractors typically appeared in distinct locations. In both experiments, effects of distractor value and location were additive, suggesting that attention-promoting effects of value and attention-suppressing effects of statistical location-learning independently modulate overall attentional priority. Our findings are consistent with a view that sees attention as mediated by a common priority map that receives and integrates separate signals relating to physical salience and value, with signal suppression based on statistical learning determined by physical salience, but not incentive salience.

Enhanced recognition of emotional images is not affected by post-exposure exercise-induced arousal.

Research suggests that aerobic exercise (i.e., exercise aiming to improve cardiovascular fitness) promotes cognition, but the impact on memory specifically, is unclear. There is some evidence to suggest that as little as one session of post-learning exercise benefits memory consolidation. Furthermore, memory may be particularly facilitated by exercise when the individual is emotionally aroused while encoding stimuli. The current study tested whether exercise after exposure to neutral and emotional images improved memory consolidation of the items among university students. Ninety-nine students were randomly instructed to either exercise or not exercise after viewing a set of images that were positive, neutral, and negative in valence, and they were later tested on their memory. Although emotional images were remembered better than non-emotional images, the results suggested that exercise did not influence this effect or enhance consolidation of the items overall. Explanations and implications for these findings are discussed.

You do it to yourself: Attentional capture by threat-signaling stimuli persists even when entirely counterproductive.

Recent research has demonstrated a counterproductive attentional bias toward threat-related stimuli: under conditions in which fixating on a color distractor stimulus sometimes resulted in an immediate shock, participants were nevertheless more likely to look at this threat-related distractor than a neutral distractor matched for physical salience. However, participants in that prior research may not have realized that their own actions caused delivery of aversive outcomes, such that monitoring for the threat-related distractor may not have been counterproductive from participants' perspective. In Experiment 1 of the current study, we demonstrate that the attentional bias to the threat-related distractor persists (and indeed, becomes stronger) when participants are made explicitly aware that looking at this stimulus is the sole cause of aversive events, which are otherwise avoidable. In Experiment 2 we replicate the bias in informed participants under conditions in which there is additional (reward-driven) motivation to avoid attending to distractors. Taken together with prior findings, the observation of an attentional bias toward the threat-related distractor under these explicitly counterproductive conditions provides strong support for the idea that threat-related stimuli are automatically prioritized by our attentional system. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

A meta-analysis of the relationship between eating restraint, impaired cognitive control and cognitive bias to food in non-clinical samples.

AIM: Food restriction is argued to be a precursor for unhealthy preoccupation with food, possibly leading to the development of an eating disorder. We updated previous meta-analyses that examined the relationship between eating restraint and deficits in either general or food-related attentional and inhibitory control. We hypothesized that inconsistencies in the literature around eating restraint, impaired cognitive control, impulsivity and cognitive biases for food could be attributed to the scale used to measure eating restraint. METHOD: A (preregistered) subgroup meta-analysis examined whether patterns of impaired cognitive control and cognitive bias for food in predominantly healthy (non-clinical) samples differed as a function of the scale used to measure eating restraint. A series of exploratory meta-analyses were carried out for specific attentional bias tasks. In total 57 datasets were included. RESULTS: The subgroup analysis did not provide evidence that the relationship between eating restraint and impaired or biased cognitions differed significantly as a function of restraint scale. Heterogeneity across studies was high. When examining specific attentional bias tasks there was no evidence that increased eating restraint was associated with increased attentional bias or distraction by food cues, regardless of which scale was used to measure eating restraint. CONCLUSIONS: There is little experimental evidence for the common narrative that increased eating restraint is related to impaired cognitive control generally or increased cognitive bias for food, in non-clinical samples.

Is the habit system altered in individuals with obesity? A systematic review.

Habit-like eating behavior is repeatedly pointed to as a key cognitive mechanism contributing to the emergence and maintenance of obesity. Here, we conducted a systematic review of the literature to assess the existent behavioral evidence for the Habit Hypothesis for Overeating (HHO) which states that obesity is the consequence of an imbalance between the habit and goal-directed reward learning systems, leading to overconsumption of food. We found a total of 19 studies implementing a variety of experimental protocols (i.e., free operant paradigm, slips-of-action test, two-step task, Pavlovian-to-Instrumental paradigm, probabilistic learning task) and manipulations. Taken together, the studies on clinical (binge eating disorder) and non-clinical individuals with overweight or obesity do not support the HHO conclusively. While the scientific literature on HHO is still in its infancy, the heterogeneity of the extant studies makes it difficult to evaluate the degree of convergence of these findings. Uncovering the role of reward learning systems in eating behaviors might have a transformative impact on public health.

Competing influences on healthy food choices: Mindsetting versus contextual food cues.

Food choices are influenced by one's current mindset, suggesting that supporting health (vs. a palatability) mindsets could improve daily food choices. The question rises, however, to what extent internal mindsets still guide choices when people are exposed to external food-context stimuli in an obesogenic environment. To examine these two competing effects we induced health vs. palatability mindsets, and investigated the robustness of the mindset effect by presenting food-context stimuli during a Pavlovian-to-Instrumental-Transfer (PIT) task in two separate cohorts of 102 (76 females) Dutch and 120 (60 females) German participants. For the mindset induction, participants rated food items on visual analogue scales (VAS), based on healthiness and palatability, respectively. In each cohort, half of the participants received a health, the other half a palatability mindset induction. Additionally, we explored whether 'mindset triggers' could be used to further shape behavior. Triggers were established by placing unfamiliar logos at the extreme ends of the VASs used for the mindset inductions. Independent of the mindset, food-associated stimuli influenced food choices in accordance with the previously learned association in each test phase. Health mindset induction biased food choices towards healthier, palatability mindset towards unhealthier choices in the first cohort, but not in the second. The mindset triggers had a more robust effect. These induced healthier (triggers for healthy and not-palatable) and unhealthier (triggers for unhealthy and palatable) food choices in both cohorts alike. Interestingly, these effects did not tamper with the overall effect of Pavlovian cues and were thus true in the presence and absence of food-context stimuli. Therefore, we show that, in our experimental setting, food-associated mindset triggers can be used to bias food choices towards a healthy snack even in an obesogenic environment.

Physiological and subjective validation of a novel stress procedure: The Simple Singing Stress Procedure.

Laboratory stress-induction procedures have been critical in illuminating the effects of stress on human health, cognition, and functioning. Here, we present a novel stress induction procedure, the Simple Singing Stress Procedure (SSSP), that overcomes some of the practical challenges and conceptual limitations of existing procedures in measuring the causal influence of stress on psychological variables. In the stress condition of the SSSP, participants were instructed to sing a song in front of the experimenter while being video- and audio-recorded. Participants were also informed that they would have to sing again at the end of the experiment, and that this second performance would later be assessed by a panel of experimenters. Participants in a no-stress condition instead read lyrics in each phase. Our findings revealed that participants in the stress condition showed significantly higher blood pressure immediately following the initial singing session, as well as heightened salivary cortisol at a latency consistent with the initial singing session, than those in the no-stress condition. Our stress procedure also generated elevations in self-reported stress ratings immediately after the first singing session and subsequently in anticipation of the second singing session, relative to the no-stress condition. Collectively, these findings suggest that the SSSP is a simple and effective stress induction procedure that may be a promising alternative to existing protocols.

Eating restraint is associated with reduced attentional capture by signals of valuable food reward.

Previous paradigms used to examine attentional distraction by task-irrelevant food words and food images were not suited for the investigation of involuntary and automatic attentional capture. In the current experiments we adapted a well-established visual-search paradigm (with eye tracking) to investigate involuntary attentional capture by food and drink rewards. We first used a satiety procedure to manipulate relative preference for different food and drink outcomes (potato chips and water in Experiment 1 and popcorn and chocolate Smarties in Experiment 2). Participants then performed the visual-search task where a coloured distractor signalled on each trial which of the two food and drink rewards was available for successful identification of the target. The signalled reward was cancelled, however, if any eye gaze was registered on the distractor. Participants were therefore motivated to try and control the automatic orienting of attention towards cues signalling valuable outcomes, in order to earn those outcomes. In both experiments we found that attention was more often captured by the distractor signalling the valuable (non-sated) outcome, replicating previous studies using this paradigm with monetary rewards. We also found that those scoring high on eating restraint (as measured with the Dutch Eating Behavior Questionnaire) were better at controlling reflexive orienting of attention to desirable food rewards. This paradigm offers a novel approach for understanding how reflexive attention and control relate to conflicts in everyday life around distracting food cues, and the moderating role of dietary restraint.

Reduced attentional capture by reward following an acute dose of alcohol.

RATIONALE: Previous research has shown that physically salient and reward-related distractors can automatically capture attention and eye gaze in a visual search task, even though participants are motivated to ignore these stimuli. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether an acute, low dose of alcohol would influence involuntary attentional capture by stimuli signalling reward. METHODS: Participants were assigned to the alcohol or placebo group before completing a visual search task. Successful identification of the target earned either a low or high monetary reward but this reward was omitted if any eye gaze was registered on the reward-signalling distractor. RESULTS: Participants who had consumed alcohol were significantly less likely than those in the placebo condition to have their attention captured by a distractor stimulus that signalled the availability of high reward. Analysis of saccade latencies suggested that this difference reflected a reduction in the likelihood of impulsive eye movements following alcohol. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that alcohol intoxication reduces the capacity to attend to information in the environment that is not directly relevant to the task at hand. In the current task, this led to a performance benefit under alcohol, but in situations that require rapid responding to salient events, the effect on behaviour would be deleterious.

Overt attentional capture by reward-related stimuli overcomes inhibitory suppression.

Salient-but-irrelevant distractors can automatically capture attention and eye-gaze in visual search. However, recent findings have suggested that attention to salient-but-irrelevant stimuli can be suppressed when observers use a specific target template to guide their search (i.e., feature search). A separate line of research has indicated that attentional selection is influenced by factors other than the physical salience of a stimulus and the observer's goals. For instance, pairing a stimulus with reward has been shown to increase the extent to which it captures attention and gaze (as though it has become more physically salient), even when such capture has negative consequences for the observer. Here we used eye-tracking with a rewarded visual search task to investigate whether capture by reward can be suppressed in the same way as capture by physical salience. When participants were encouraged to use feature search, attention to a distractor paired with relatively small reward was suppressed. However, under the same conditions attention was captured by a distractor paired with large reward, even when such capture resulted in reward omission. These findings suggest that reward-related stimuli are given special priority within the visual attention system over and above physically salient stimuli, and have implications for our understanding of real-world biases to reward-related stimuli, such as those seen in addiction. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Measuring habit formation through goal-directed response switching.

Reward-learning theory views habits as stimulus-response links formed through extended reward training. Accordingly, animal research has shown that actions that are initially goal-directed can become habitual after operant overtraining. However, a similar demonstration is absent in human research, which poses a serious problem for translational models of behavior. We propose that response-time (RT) switch cost after operant training can be used as a new, reliable marker for the operation of the habit system in humans. Using a new method, we show that RT switch cost demonstrates the properties that would be expected of a habitual behavior: (a) it increases with overtraining, (b) it increases when rewards are larger, and (c) it increases when time pressure is added to the task, thereby hindering the competing goal-directed system. These results offer a promising new pathway for studying the operation of the habit system in humans. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Delayed disengagement of attention from distractors signalling reward.

Attention refers to the set of cognitive mechanisms that facilitate the prioritization of incoming sensory information. Existing research suggests that motivationally salient stimuli, such as those associated with reward, are prioritized by the attention system and that this prioritization occurs independently of an observer's goals. Specifically, studies of visual search have shown that stimuli signalling the availability of monetary reward are more likely to capture eye movements, even when participants are motivated to ignore such stimuli. In the current study we ask whether reward magnitude influences only the likelihood that stimuli will capture spatial attention, or whether reward also influences the ease with which people can disengage attention from a location when they are motivated to move their attention elsewhere. Three experiments examined the time taken to disengage from a centrally presented distractor that signalled the availability of high or low reward. We found that participants took longer to move their eyes away from a high-reward distractor, even though this came at financial cost (Experiment 1), that participants were unable to suppress a high-reward distractor consistently presented at the central location (Experiment 2), that slower responding was not due to behavioural freezing in the presence of a signal of high reward (Experiment 3), and that slower responding persisted even when rewards were no longer available (Experiment 4). These results indicate that reward modulates attentional disengagement: signals of high reward hold attention for longer, even when this is counterproductive for performance of ongoing tasks. Our findings further highlight the role of reward in the conflict between automatic and goal-directed attentional processing.

Attentional capture by Pavlovian reward-signalling distractors in visual search persists when rewards are removed.

Existing research indicates that learning about the Pavlovian 'signal value' of stimuli can induce attentional biases: findings suggest that our attentional system prioritises detection of stimuli that have previously signalled availability of high reward. These findings potentially provide a human analogue of sign-tracking behaviour previously reported in studies of non-human animals. Here we examine a visual search task that has been developed to demonstrate the Pavlovian influence of reward on attention, in which the critical reward-signalling stimuli are never explicit targets of search. This procedure has previously yielded robust effects of reward on attention; however it remains unclear whether this pattern reflects a persistent and automatic bias in attentional capture based on prior experience of stimulus-reward pairings, or whether it results from participants strategically attending to reward-signalling distractors because they provide useful information about reward magnitude. To investigate this issue, in the current study participants initially completed a rewarded visual search task, in which colours of distractor stimuli signalled availability of high or low reward. Participants then completed a test phase in which rewards were no longer available, such that distractor colours no longer provided useful information on reward availability. Performance during the initial rewarded phase was impaired by the presence of a distractor signalling availability of high relative to low reward. Crucially, the magnitude of this reward-related distraction effect did not reduce in the subsequent unrewarded test phase. This suggests that participants' experience of differences in reward value signalled by distractor stimuli in this task can induce persistent biases in the extent to which these stimuli involuntarily capture attention, even when they are entirely task-irrelevant.